Constitutional Court held a judicial review hearing on lieu of law 1/2014 (regional election Perppu). Some revisions were applied by the five Applicants.  

In the Constitutional Justice Maria Farida Indrati-led trial, Kurniawan as a Plaintiff accentuated his demand by saying that KPU has no legal rights to conduct regional election as the provision was replaced. “KPU has no rights in holding regional election,” he said in MK Plenary Room, Jakarta, Wednesday, (11/26).  

In the mean time, another Plaintiff, Yanda Zaihifni Ishak, stated that parties transaction, non-democratic measure, and violated constitutional rights by the ruling of lieu of law 1/2014.

Before the closing trial, Panel of Justice validated all evidences as registered by the Plaintiff. The result will be taken to consultative meeting to be proceeded into testimonial hearing.

Previously,president was condemned has failed to issue a decree as president is the chairman of the Democratic Party that when it became the ruling party in parliament.

The establishment of formal regulation assessed disability because it does not meet the three reasons for the president to issue Lieu of Law. First, the urgent need, second, legislation is needed yet, and third, the legal vacuum cannot be overcome by making laws.

While the applicant\\'s case Number 118 / PUU-XII / 2014, Victor Santoso Tandiasa as a representative of the Forum of Justice and Constitutional Studies said petition refers to Decision No. 97 / PUU-XI / 2013 regarding the authority of the Court in dealing with the election dispute. "There, the Constitutional Court expressly said that the election was not the regime Election, therefore, the Court is not competent to deal with disputes elections," he said.

Accordingly, Applicant assessed Act 22/2014 which mandates that the elections held through the mechanism of representation in parliament was appropriate because it has to distinguish between the election regime to the local election regime. However, a Perpuu was issued stating the organization of elections in the regulation uses General Election Commission. In fact, the applicant assesses the Commission is governed by the constitution as an independent institution that organizes elections every five years, the elections to elect members of the House of Representatives, the President, and the Vice President, and parliament.

Although the law was repealed by Perpuu, Applicant judge rules that have been revoked cannot be revived despite the repeal rule was repealed by another rule. Therefore, the applicant considers the application of Perpuu imposed, and potentially polemical in the community to question the legitimacy of the organization of the elections by the Commission as a constitutional norm.  (Revan Akbari/Bagus Pranowo/Hanifah)